Hi, I'm a Moderator for this topic. I've been working hard to find a Professional to assist you right away, but sometimes finding the right Professional can take a little longer than expected.
I wonder whether you're ok with continuing to wait for an answer. If you are, please let me know and I will continue my search. If not, feel free to let me know and I will cancel this question for you. Thank you!
I can wait till about 5 pm London time. Then I will have to cancel it.
The country in question is the UK, not USA. Must have mistyped the country.
Thanks so much for your reply!
I am not sure which law is applicable.Based on the limited information provided,I would argue the following.........
If the U.K. has not ratified the treaty, then the U.K. courts would not be obliged to consider its parameters. If France had ratified the treaty, this might be problematic, but less so. After all, France is receiving minerals mined from the coastline of another country. The dispute is not really a dispute between nations. Rather, the dispute is one pertaining to contractual agreements; i.e. the one between the barge owners and the U.K. company.
The barge owners erroneously quoted the volume required to presumably inflate the price.
The company that charted the barge feels cheated.
If this were to enter into arbitration, the decision would be binding and the decision is winner takes all. Therefore, one party has everything to lose!
On the other hand, alternate dispute resolution such as mediation might serve both these parties' needs. After all, each has a vested interest in the outcome. Each has something to lose. Provided that the transport was legal, that the U.K. company had the applicable licensure, etc., the U.K. company would theoretically gain some compensation during the mediation.
It the treaty were applicable, the case could be referred to the appropriate tribunal such as the one designated for the Law of the Sea- http://www.itlos.org/
This form, however, results in arbitration. Few cases have been presented to the tribunal, nineteen to be exact.
Does that help?
I'll gladly open this to other experts if you require further assistance. DXJ
You actually make excellent points!!!
Given the information in the scenario, it is difficult to know whether the barge owners(company) is UK based or foreign. Therefore, it is difficult to know which laws are applicable or which organizations would preside over arbitration or ADR.
1. Nevertheless, the contract itself should clarify the terms of agreement. If the barge owners actually inflated the pricing and did so in ways that violated the terms of the contract the UK company could seek compensatory damages.
2. If DWT was used in the contractual agreement and the DWT was accurate, then the UK Company might not have a case. Again, the actual contractual agreement would contain the specifications and parameters of the agreement. Of course, barges are subject to DWT limits, restrictions, etc.
3. I did peruse some charter contractual agreement claims but did not find any reflecting these conditions. Perhaps, you might review them and see if any of them is applicable.
I hope this helps! I have left this open to other experts, as well. DXJ
Thanks. I had mentioned in the very beginning that both companies are UK based. Would that change your assessment?
Did you need further assistance with this? Please let me know. I'd be glad to help! DXJ
Victor was robbed and beaten by a man wearing a rubber